Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Fix wrong EOF compare

2013-01-31 Thread Rob Landley
On 01/13/2013 12:15:41 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 01/13/13 03:44, Rob Landley wrote: > On 01/11/2013 08:21:55 AM, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 11 2013, Minchan Kim wrote: >> > The C standards allows the character type char to be singed or unsinged, >> > depending on the platform and

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Fix wrong EOF compare

2013-01-13 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 01/13/13 03:44, Rob Landley wrote: > On 01/11/2013 08:21:55 AM, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 11 2013, Minchan Kim wrote: >> > The C standards allows the character type char to be singed or unsinged, >> > depending on the platform and compiler. Most of systems uses signed char, >> > b

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Fix wrong EOF compare

2013-01-13 Thread Rob Landley
On 01/11/2013 08:21:55 AM, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: On Fri, Jan 11 2013, Minchan Kim wrote: > The C standards allows the character type char to be singed or unsinged, > depending on the platform and compiler. Most of systems uses signed char, > but those based on PowerPC and ARM processors t

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Fix wrong EOF compare

2013-01-11 Thread Michal Nazarewicz
On Fri, Jan 11 2013, Minchan Kim wrote: > The C standards allows the character type char to be singed or unsinged, > depending on the platform and compiler. Most of systems uses signed char, > but those based on PowerPC and ARM processors typically use unsigned char. > This can lead to unexpected

[PATCH v2 1/2] Fix wrong EOF compare

2013-01-10 Thread Minchan Kim
The C standards allows the character type char to be singed or unsinged, depending on the platform and compiler. Most of systems uses signed char, but those based on PowerPC and ARM processors typically use unsigned char. This can lead to unexpected results when the variable is used to compare with